Posted on 08/05/2005 7:45:55 PM PDT by Black Tooth
House Majority Leader Tom DeLay urged Texas police Thursday night to begin rounding up illegal immigrants, and said he backed legislation that would cut off federal funds to cities that don't enforce U.S. immigration laws.
Speaking to a gathering of Fort Bend County, Texas Republicans, DeLay said that if police rounded up illegals, the federal government would find places to house them.
Story Continues Below
In quotes picked up by the Houston Chronicle, the top Republican urged: "If you pick up 50 or 100 of them, you can call the National Guard." As for housing, DeLay said: "Put them in tents."
He noted that until now, even the federal government has not rounded up illegal immigrants in U.S. cities, because federal agents had no place to detain them. The situation is changing, however, under the new leadership at the Department of Homeland Security, he said.
DeLay emphasized that he's a strong supporter of legal immigration. But he opposes educating illegal immigrants using U.S. tax dollars or having their U.S.-born children automatically become American citizens.
According to the Chronicle, he blasted Houston city officials for their lax attitude toward illegal immigration, saying, "It greatly concerns me that the police chief in Houston, Texas, has created a sanctuary in Houston by announcing that he is not going to enforce our laws."
DeLay said he supported legislation introduced by Rep. Tom Tancredo that would withhold federal funding from cities like Houston that ignore federal immigration regulations.
Other big city governments, including New York City, that do not enforce immigration laws and would presumably also be at risk to have federal subsidies yanked under the provision supported by DeLay.
I rather suspect this position that Tom is taking is designed more to get the Republicans through the mid-terms. If tough legislation isn't passed, signed and enacted BEFORE the mid-terms then you can probably be assured that there won't be anything favorable after the elections. Instead you will likely get an amnesty (aka guest worker) bill that Bush will be all too happy to sign. Get your part FIRST or be left holding the bag once again.
You nailed it with your comments. As I mentioned in another response, the leadership is realizing that the traditional support is extremely upset at the lack of enforcement of our immigration laws. DeLay is blowing smoke until amnesty is passed.
That sounds very good. However, in the CAFTA agreement and the one that is coming down the pike, FTAA, any country that seeks to prohibit goods, services and people who come into the country to take advantage of these, can't be deported. Unless the so called "impartial tribunal of free traders" would agree to deportation.
I like his idea of withholding funds from cities who give sanction to illegals. I'd like it more if he'd stop Bush from redistributing our wealth to Mexico through out sourcing of high paying jobs, and welfare for every illegal in Mexico or the US.
Also, nothing will work until a lawsuit is brought up against the anchor baby crap. That's something these Republican politicians don't think the common American knows about. But we do!
The U.S. Constitution reigns supreme -- not CAFTA. Why carry the water of the anti-sovereigns on this?
Man, I got all excited until I got to this part.
House them?
How about bussing them? Immediately. To the border. Dump them there.
Housing costs: zero.
My guess: Watch him run for the tall grass if GWB goes around berating this as "soft bigotry" or "vigilantism"...
When worshiped with the same fervor as dogma, this becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy.
I find those theoretical contributions not very helpful; indeed unacceptable.
If we are forced to spend unnecessarily, I want at least to decide what to spend on, not to allow the criminal to add insult to injury.
I say spend it on the endless bus ride. One way. Towards the border. As many times as necessary.
Let the Mexican government pay for the hospitality facilities.
On their side of the border.
It may not be cheaper, but it can't last forever. And I have some satisfaction in at least feeling I have some say in the process.
Sophistry.
Clearly, it is non-zero, and more a qualitative statement that a quantitative one.
Any answer greater than zero is unacceptable.
He can't back step on this now.
Too late.
He either pursues this, or he's done politically.
That is probably the worse, most self-damaging law we have.
You're welcome.
DeLay's the only guy in DC who is fit to be the Prez!
Correction.
At the risk of hijacking the thread, it is the most damaging interpretation of a Constitutional provision that we have.
There was a brief period in history when sanity prevailed and the provision was not deemed to apply to foreign nationals, illegal travelers and foreign agents.
Consider this scenario: Achmed travels (illegaly) with a pregnant woman deemed his wife. His mission? Kill as many Americans as possible. If that woman drops a little Achmed at any time before or after the deed, most here on FR and most courts would consider little Achmed a legal anchor baby.
Pity.... his party will call him a moonbat..
while hanging from their feet in the cloakroom,
squeeking like moonbats themselves...
Hopefully both DeLay and Tancredo will escape media attempts to destroy them and coast to reelection next year.
.. urged Texas police Thursday night to begin rounding up illegal immigrants...
I need to get these glasses checked.
I stand corrected.
Glad to hear some things may be changing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.